Pilbara Iron Ore Pty Ltd v Ammon

Pilbara Iron Ore Pty Ltd (the applicant) filed a plaint in the Mining Warden's Court seeking a declaration that a condition precedent to the transfer of a mining tenement had not been fulfilled. Ammon (the defendant) responded by filing a claim in the Supreme Court for specific performance of the agreement. The applicant then filed an application in the Supreme Court to stay the proceedings in the Supreme Court on the basis that the same matter was being litigated in the Mining Warden's Court. The court was required to determine whether the proceedings in the Supreme Court should be stayed on the basis that the same matter was being litigated in the Mining Warden's Court. The court referred to the principle that a person should not be allowed to institute proceedings in any court if the circumstances are such that to do so would be vexatious. The court held that the proceedings in the Supreme Court were vexatious as the same issue was being raised by the applicant in the Mining Warden's Court. The court found that the public interest required the court to stay the proceedings in the Supreme Court. The court followed the decision of Buckley J in Thames Launches Ltd v Trinity House Corporation of Deptford Strond [1961] Ch 197 and the Full Court in Christmas Island Resort Pty Ltd v Geraldton Building Co Pty Ltd (No 5) (1997) 18 WAR 334. The court granted the application and stayed the proceedings in the Supreme Court.